Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Thunderbird 900

Sarah Beeny, Silly Billy...

Recommended Posts

Deep Joy...

Why did she rip apart her own 97-room listed mansion without planning permission?

"Rise Hall stood empty and forlorn, its once imperious Ionic columns crumbling, its slate roof under threat of collapse.

The 97-room mansion, one of the East Riding’s finest stately homes, was a restoration project no one was brave enough to take on.

But then Sarah Beeny, television’s ubiquitous property expert, came across the house in East Yorkshire — and it was love at first sight. She and her husband, artist Graham Swift, bought it for just £435,000 and set about restoring the country pile.

Last year, ten years on, 39-year-old Miss Beeny opened its doors to the public in a television programme about the project.

Among the viewers was Matthew Grove, the area’s Conservative ward councillor, who lives two miles away. He watched with astonishment as Sarah showed off the sweeping staircase, the cornicing, delicate paintwork and bedroom panelling.

Where, he thought, was the paperwork seeking planning permission for alterations to this Grade II* listed building?"

Read on... :lol:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2053095/Sarah-Beeny-rips-97-room-listed-mansion-apart-planning-permission.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deep Joy...

Why did she rip apart her own 97-room listed mansion without planning permission?

"Rise Hall stood empty and forlorn, its once imperious Ionic columns crumbling, its slate roof under threat of collapse.

The 97-room mansion, one of the East Riding's finest stately homes, was a restoration project no one was brave enough to take on.

But then Sarah Beeny, television's ubiquitous property expert, came across the house in East Yorkshire — and it was love at first sight. She and her husband, artist Graham Swift, bought it for just £435,000 and set about restoring the country pile.

Last year, ten years on, 39-year-old Miss Beeny opened its doors to the public in a television programme about the project.

Among the viewers was Matthew Grove, the area's Conservative ward councillor, who lives two miles away. He watched with astonishment as Sarah showed off the sweeping staircase, the cornicing, delicate paintwork and bedroom panelling.

Where, he thought, was the paperwork seeking planning permission for alterations to this Grade II* listed building?"

Read on... :lol:

http://www.dailymail...permission.html

she did it because planning would be refused... In the case of a TV celeb and a stately home it is better to just do the work and apply for retrospective planning if you need to later on. If/When the story hits the media...the ocal council look nasty and evil to the majority of the population they cave in and grant you the permission you would never have got if you had applied for it (and never got it in the first place)

Its part of the plan, there would have been no sensible way to apply before making the changes, they wouldn't have been allowed to change anything and it would have never been repaired.

Edited by AteMoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched it the other day. They were doing the dining room. The fireplace was missing so to save money, rather than building one out of marble, they made one from MDF and had someone paint a marble effect on it. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deep Joy...

Why did she rip apart her own 97-room listed mansion without planning permission?

"Rise Hall stood empty and forlorn, its once imperious Ionic columns crumbling, its slate roof under threat of collapse.

The 97-room mansion, one of the East Riding’s finest stately homes, was a restoration project no one was brave enough to take on.

But then Sarah Beeny, television’s ubiquitous property expert, came across the house in East Yorkshire — and it was love at first sight. She and her husband, artist Graham Swift, bought it for just £435,000 and set about restoring the country pile.

Last year, ten years on, 39-year-old Miss Beeny opened its doors to the public in a television programme about the project.

Among the viewers was Matthew Grove, the area’s Conservative ward councillor, who lives two miles away. He watched with astonishment as Sarah showed off the sweeping staircase, the cornicing, delicate paintwork and bedroom panelling.

Where, he thought, was the paperwork seeking planning permission for alterations to this Grade II* listed building?"

Read on... :lol:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2053095/Sarah-Beeny-rips-97-room-listed-mansion-apart-planning-permission.html

I’m intrigued; can anyone post an image of Ms Beenys astonishing cornicing?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

MDF fireplace. I thought i might have imagined it, but it's here in the radio times.

...it’s interesting in this first episode to see wallpaper being printed by hand and to discover how an MDF fireplace can look almost as good as the original. Plus the sight of Beeny in Regency frock and posh hairdo rather than her usual dress-down attire is quite something.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has already been done but good on her.

Thousands of historical buildings are rotting in the ground because these self important, self promoting preservation Nazis would rather see that than concede an inch.

What I recall, I watched it a while ago, is that the building had been well knocked about anyway with a big 1960 brick gym extension and much of the interior gutted when it was converted into a school.

If she'd have gone the conventional route they'd have had her restoring it to it's original splendour costing millions.

The place is now structurally safe, none of the original fabric has been further damaged and that that already was has been stabilized.

She has a lovely home and a potentially profitable business.

But no, the state was bypassed and the state needs feeding.............

We can be a bunch of two faced bitter bastards on here at times.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She has a lovely home and a potentially profitable business.

But no, the state was bypassed and the state needs feeding.............

We can be a bunch of two faced bitter bastards on here at times.

That she wasn't paying business rates on.

Or presumably council tax.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That she wasn't paying business rates on.

Or presumably council tax.

The programme showed one event, a wedding, as a dry run. There was no suggestion that she was getting paid or that the place was being run as a business, only that it was her intention to do so later at some point. So no business rates required.

As for council tax, I'll have to sak her how she got round that one as I thought it was impossible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like Sarah Beeny and good luck to her with the house, but my God, she is being disingenuous here.

She will have known perfectly well she needed permission (except perhaps for the reversion from school to dwelling). Some of the permissions she wouldn't have got, some she would have got but it would have taken ages and messed up her plans for the tv show. Listed building owners do this all the time - do the work first and then either apply retrospectively or not apply at all, a pragmatic response to a well-meaning but quite slow and labour-intensive bureaucratic process, and they know there is a risk of a fine or having to undo the work. I can't believe someone in her position doesn't have a load of friends who own listed houses and have done this.

Her claim that she thought she could rent rooms out to overnight guests without any kind of license because it wasn't a hotel is completely ridiculous, I have friends who opened a B&B recently and they had to jump through all kinds of hoops to comply with fire regs etc and I would have thought any normal person would expect that.

The air of injured innocence is really grating.

I reckon she just wants to sell and is milking the row partly to make a good tv show and partly as an excuse for buyers as to why she is leaving when it's supposedly got such great business potential.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She is doing all of this just to get more and more publicity so that eventually some rich foreigner that has watched too many episodes of Downton Abbey will buy it for kensington prices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Watched it the other day. They were doing the dining room. The fireplace was missing so to save money, rather than building one out of marble, they made one from MDF and had someone paint a marble effect on it. :angry:

She seems to be tackling jobs as though she were flipping the place. I suppose that is what she is about house makeovers to make money, no worries if the work is dodgy and it will fall to bits after the place is sold.

She could have got an exact replica of the stolen firplace for £14,000 made up, but she chose MDF, like she was creating some fantasy walk around attraction at Euro Disney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whilst I haven't seen this program I do have every sympathy with anyone dealing with the Conservation Nazis employed by councils.

Having restored an old farmhouse parts of which had not been used for 70 years I know how these idiots think. They would prefer to see old buildings fall down rather than be restored. We had window openings that had never had glass in, only shutters. We were told we could have glass but it had to be single glazed! Also a floor with broken flagstones had to be left in place, even though parts were concrete and it was all damp. Needless to say we just ignored them and got on regardless.

The lazy sods at the council never came to look after all the work was done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

she did it because planning would be refused... In the case of a TV celeb and a stately home it is better to just do the work and apply for retrospective planning if you need to later on. If/When the story hits the media...the ocal council look nasty and evil to the majority of the population they cave in and grant you the permission you would never have got if you had applied for it (and never got it in the first place)

Its part of the plan, there would have been no sensible way to apply before making the changes, they wouldn't have been allowed to change anything and it would have never been repaired.

Something like what the travellers did?

Can Sarah expect equal treatment in the eyes of the law?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Deep Joy...

Why did she rip apart her own 97-room listed mansion without planning permission?

Oh Folly! Wanting to wake up in the heavenly bode … impossibold, of course, but maybe perchance to dream it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This has already been done but good on her.

Thousands of historical buildings are rotting in the ground because these self important, self promoting preservation Nazis would rather see that than concede an inch.

What I recall, I watched it a while ago, is that the building had been well knocked about anyway with a big 1960 brick gym extension and much of the interior gutted when it was converted into a school.

If she'd have gone the conventional route they'd have had her restoring it to it's original splendour costing millions.

The place is now structurally safe, none of the original fabric has been further damaged and that that already was has been stabilized.

She has a lovely home and a potentially profitable business.

But no, the state was bypassed and the state needs feeding.............

We can be a bunch of two faced bitter bastards on here at times.

So where do you draw the line?

How badly neglected does a building need to be?

That's why we have planning permission. You can argue your case such as its state of neglect and proposed renovation. If it was done your way then it would be a free for all and the UK would have no historical sites of interest left. Move to the USA if you want to live in a sad little world like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So where do you draw the line?

How badly neglected does a building need to be?

That's why we have planning permission. You can argue your case such as its state of neglect and proposed renovation. If it was done your way then it would be a free for all and the UK would have no historical sites of interest left. Move to the USA if you want to live in a sad little world like that.

Read my post again.

It's not my way it is THE way. The local conservation departments have become so onerous that they are now bypassed, ignored or at the very best consulted after the event.

These places are not national monuments there are hundreds of them rotting in the countryside as they are too expensive to repair. The National trust maintains hundreds of similar properties around the UK.

They might be pretty but they are not that special. It's not an Ancient Monument, a Heritage Site or even Grad I listed. It's not even 200 years old, I've lived in hoses older and probably architecturally more significant.

Someday we'll get a grip and realise what as a nation we should, and can afford to, keep and let the market dictate the fate of the rest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched this program last week, it struck me that Sarah is trying to live the dream. There were shot of her children playing in the grounds and mucking about in the lake. As has already been pointed out she's used to doing well meaning bodges and then flipping, so never facing the reality of short-cuts. Funnily, when in the past on her shows hers come across a previous owners bodge her quick enough to decry the poor results.

Sarah is obviously hoping that some rich foreigner is going to fall in love with Rise Hall and absolutely have to have it what ever the cost. She'll then be able to make a new series where she advises people on ultimate flipping of multimillion pound mansions.

A relatives home is listed and he's got a long list of grievances with planning law. Standard wooden windows in an extension built in the last century would have to be replaced with single glazed replicas which were fitted in the 70s. What annoys him is that planning departments refuse to accept that a build needs to be economically sustainable. His place costs a fortune to heat and although there are ways to insulate it many are prohibitively expensive for a dwelling. Window facing out must be replicas and secondary internal glazing can be fitted, however because of the needed air gap that becomes impractical. To muddy the waters he's a spring that rises in the kitchen and then feeds a local trout farm. He's not allowed to alter that because of the combination of water regs and conservation rules. :angry:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The irony is that if planning laws had been around when some of these listed buildings were constructed, they wouldn't have been built as they wouldn't have got planning consent.

It is like a recent grand designs where a couple restored a run down Victorian terrace in London, they spent 90 grand restoring it and it looked like a good investment. That is until right at the end of the show you realise they only have the property on a 10 year lease from the council. They seemed very assured that the council would renew their lease no questions asked, given that they were a couple with no kids and the property had 3 or 4 bedrooms that is a bit of a stretch given new council policies on occupancy rates.

This would be the very same council whose preservation officers where insisting everything was done to maintain the original features and decorate the property in character. Its highly ironic and hypocritical of the council who as the owners allowed the property to run to ruin to such an extent the roof was in danger of collapsing taking the whole building with it.

Bureaucracy has gone mad in this country. Planning is meant to make good town planning and stop the rise of ghettos, unfortunately in some London boroughs this has totally failed with people living in sheds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A relatives home is listed and he's got a long list of grievances with planning law. Standard wooden windows in an extension built in the last century would have to be replaced with single glazed replicas which were fitted in the 70s. What annoys him is that planning departments refuse to accept that a build needs to be economically sustainable. His place costs a fortune to heat and although there are ways to insulate it many are prohibitively expensive for a dwelling. Window facing out must be replicas and secondary internal glazing can be fitted, however because of the needed air gap that becomes impractical. To muddy the waters he's a spring that rises in the kitchen and then feeds a local trout farm. He's not allowed to alter that because of the combination of water regs and conservation rules. :angry:

The Queen has to put up with similar issues, I read somewhere.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Read my post again.

It's not my way it is THE way. The local conservation departments have become so onerous that they are now bypassed, ignored or at the very best consulted after the event.

These places are not national monuments there are hundreds of them rotting in the countryside as they are too expensive to repair. The National trust maintains hundreds of similar properties around the UK.

They might be pretty but they are not that special. It's not an Ancient Monument, a Heritage Site or even Grad I listed. It's not even 200 years old, I've lived in hoses older and probably architecturally more significant.

Someday we'll get a grip and realise what as a nation we should, and can afford to, keep and let the market dictate the fate of the rest.

+1

In the town where I live the Conservation Nazis, along with the rest of the council are trying to move out of their Grade II listed offices because they cant afford the maintenance costs. They are people of such limited vision that the irony is lost on them.

They manage thousands of mediocre poorly built regency houses of no special significance, their main role to be to say 'no' whenever anyone asks them a question.

They are despised by all of the building trades and ignored by as many people as can get away with it. The golden rule is never, ever let them inside your property,

Simple solution is to abolish English Heritage and de-list 80 or 90% of current listed buildings. That won't happen until we get to roughly where Greece is today. This is one reason that I'm enjoying the current euro crisis so much, because it brings the day of collapse just that bit closer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I did see some of the restoration program and cringed a bit at the bodged jobs being carried out (in makeover style) particularly as the house was grade 2 * listed (more than your average grade 2 listed (which most listed buildings are) ) but I guess it made good TV

as I live voluntarily in a grade 2 listed cottage I am quite happy to maintain the outside in historical fashion as I hate unsympathetic alterations but find the necessity to maintain the inside 'as is' a bit of an intrusion.

I didn't watch all the programs as I got tired of seeing cheeky young beenies running riot in the grounds - not very entertaining :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Never watched the show as I am not interested in programmes devoted to houses. Full stop. Same as I was not interested in watching LLL. And since I will never own my own home, why should I care about Beeny, Allsop et al. I'd rather watch Father Ted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

She's someone who has helped flippers, developers, and general property mania grow in this country until young people are priced out and being sold a wrong 'un by the government.

Having supported the system by showing how easy it is to make a profit on mainstream tv for 8 years she's now showing off the fruits of her labour...

If she'd done it properly with all the permissions then it wouldn't be ready to air on tv yet.

Do you think Ch4 paid her a few pence for the show?

She was probably paid quite a lot of money AND by not having planning permission/paying business rates she can attract press attention AND be discussed endlessly in forums like this.

If she's shown her kids running round in the grounds, then don't get swayed by any emotional twaddle. She used to have as a mantra "it's about 3 prices. The price you buy it for, the price it costs to do it up and the price you sell it for..."

Don't think she hasn't got her eye on the bottom line like anyone else.

The rules are there for a reason and if you don't think they're right then you don't just ignore them - you try and change them.

In contrast HFW's fish campaign has probably earnt him a few quid and got petitions and interest going about sustainable fishing.

Why didn't she do a similar campaign and have her TV show about filming the decline of a building *whilst* jumping through hoops?

Is it because there'd be less money in it for her?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 284 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.